committed the Oracles of God Therefore Epiphanius proves Epiph. de menâ— pond the Bookes of Wisedome and Ecclesiasticus not to be Canonicall because they were not kept in the Arke And S. Augustin calls the Iewes our Librarie-keepers who are so zealous of the Old Testament that they will rather loose their life then one line of it So carefull also hath the Christian Church beene of both Testaments that many Martyrs have chosen to give their Bodies rather then their Bibles to bee burnt Neither doth it onely belong to the Church to keepe the holy Bookes but also to discerne betweene true Scripture and false And so shee is the Defender of the Scripture to which purpose the Spirit of Christ is given unto her whereby she knoweth the voyce of the Bridegroome Here the Church of Rome hath abused her power and betrayed her trust inserting into the Canon diverse Apocryphall bookes which were not written by divine inspiration nor received by the Church in S. Ieromes dayes And as she is the keeper and maintainer of the holy Records So she is as a Herauld Common-cryer to publish notifie propound and commend these Records as the Word of God unto all men For this cause is the Church called the Pillar of Truth because shee beareth up the Truth by her publicke ministery and sheweth us the holy Bookes So that the Testimonie of the Church is an excellent meanes to know the Scripture to be from God even the first motive and occasion of our faith The Key which openeth the doore of entrance into the knowledge of the Scriptures The Watchman that holds out the light in open view and presents the shining beames thereof to all that have eyes to discerne it The guide that directs and assists us to finde out those Arguments in Scripture wherby the Divinitie of it is proved And so like the morning starre introduces that cleare light which shineth in the word it selfe But the testimony of the Church is not the onely nor the chiefe cause of our knowledge nor the formall object of our faith As the Samaritanes at first believed for the saying of the woman Ioh. IV. 39. but afterward because of his own word saying Now wee beleeve not because of thy saying for wee have heard him our selves And as Nathaneel was induced to come to Christ by the Testimony of Philip but was perswaded to beleeve that he was the Messias by what he heard from himselfe as may appeare by his confession Rabbi Ioh. I. 45 4â— thou art the sonne of God so men are first induced to beleeve that this Booke is the holy Scripture by the Testimony of the Church but after they receive greater assurance when their eyes are opened to see that light which shineth in the Scripture To use a more familiar similitude If a man bring you a letter from your father and tell you he received it out of his owne hand you beleeve him but are better assured when you consider the seale subscription forme of Characters and matter contayned in the Letters So are we perswaded of the divinity of the Scripture The Scripture is an epistle sent unto us from God our father The Church is the messenger and tells us that shee received it from him Wee give credite unto her Report but when we peruse it and consider the divinity of the matter the sublimity of the style the efficacy of the speach we are fully perswaded that the same is from God indeed In a word the Church commends the Scripture to be Gods word not by her owne authority but by the verity of the thing it selfe and arguments drawne out of Scripture which proveth it selfe to be divine even as the Sunne manifests it selfe to bee the Sunne a learned man proveth himselfe to be learned and as Wisedome is justified of her children for which cause the Scripture is called a fyre a hammer a word that is lively mighty in operation a light shining in a darke place All which sheweth that it hath a certayne in-bred power to prove manifest it selfe without any outward testimony And therefore the Authority of the Scripture in respect of us doth not depend vpon the voyce of the Church And yet is the Church bound to give testimony to the Scripture we are bound to heare her Testimony Further as the Church is to propound Sect. 16. so to expound the Scripture apply them by preaching and administration of the Sacraments Wee are all of us so blinde in heavenly mysteries that we may say with the Eunuch of Ethiopia Act. Vâ—ll â—â—4 How can I understand except I had a guide God hath appointed us guides to expound unto us the Scripture and to apply the same for doctrine for confutation for Correction for Instruction These bee the uses of Scripture II. Tim. III. 16. and it is The man of God that is the minister and Pastor who is to expound the Scripture and apply it unto these ends In the II. of Haggai vers 12. the Lord sayth Aske now the Priests concerning the Law And Malach. II. 7. The Priests lips should preserve knowledge and they should seeke the Law at his mouth To them it belongs to teach preach labour in the word divide the word exhort confute rebuke as the Apostle directs his two Sonnes Timothie Bishop of Ephesus and Titus Bishop of Creta When Christ was to remove his bodily presence he established his ministry upon earth when he ascended up on high he gave gifts unto men He gave some to be Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastours and teachers Eph. IIII. 11. He sent forth his disciples with the like commission as he receaved from his father saying As my father sâ—â—t me even so I send you And agayne Goe teach all Nations baptizing them c. Matth. XXVIII 19.20 That this is the office of the Pastors is manifest and acknowledged by all but they must remember that they expound Scripture by Scripture and according to the meaning of the Law-giver comparing spirituall things with spirituall things and adding nothing of their owne Herein the Church of Rome hath abused her power assigning unto Scripture what sense she pleaseth even that which will make most for her owne turne This is ingenuously confessed by Cusanus Apud Illyâ— Clav. Script p. â— Tract 7. that the Church may expound the Scripture one way at one time another way at an other time still fitting the sense of the Scripture to the practise of the Church As they have done touching these words in the institution of the Sacrament Drinke yee all of this which by the auncient Church sayth he were so vnderstood that even the people were to receave the cup By the moderne Church in another sense But howsoever they have betrayed their trust let us not despise the Iudgement of the Catholick Church in expounding the Scripture For as the Scripture is the perfect rule of faith so the Iudgement of the Church
example of Christ in ceremonies and circumstances then we are able to imitate him in his miracles Christ wore a seamelesse coat christened in rivers preached in the fields answered nothing for himselfe before the Iudge when hee was questioned I hope none of you holds himselfe bound to follow his example in these things Matâ—h XIV 19. c. XV. 35.26 Mat VI. 40. Luk. XXIV 30. Christ alwayes caused the people to these things Christ alwayes caused the people to sit downe before he blessed the meat And yet you commonly stand in blessing especially before meate Yea if wee were bound to imitate Christ in the gesture which he used in holy duties wee should bee bound unto impossibilities for Christ in the same dutie used diverse gestures at diverse times he kneâ—â—ed downe and prayed Luk. XXII 41. He fell on his face and prayed Matth. XXVI 39. He caused the people sit downe and prayed for a blessing Matth. XIV 19. All these gestures he hath sanctified in that Ordinance and commended unto us by his example yet we can not use them all in one act at the same time therefore we are free to pray in any gesture provided wee have respect to decency conveniencie and peace Now if wee bee not bound to Christs example in any ceremony circumstance or gesture were it not strange if we should be tyed to imitate the example of his gesture in the Sacrament II. If Christ sate at the Sacrament it was only once Matt. XXVI 55. but in preaching hee sate often as hee sayth I sate daily teaching in the Temple and yet you hold not your selves bound to preach sitting Now were it not strange if Christs once sitting in one ordinance should be exemplary and not his often sitting in another III. There was never any gesture essentiall to any Sacrament either under the Law or under the Gospell for wee know not what gesture was used in Circumcision and in Baptisme and it is manifest that the gesture of the Passeover was varyed from standing to lying I say further there was never example of gesture in any ordinance or holy service which bound the Church absolutely but so as it might be chaunged upon occasion We have examples in Scripture of all gestures used in praying in thanksgiving in hearing of the Word in offering of sacrifice And I doe here challenge you all to shew me but one example of gesture in any Sacrament or any other part of God's service that did absolutely bind the Church under the Law or under the Gospell to the imitation thereof and I will yeild that Christs gesture in the Sacrament bindes us to imitation but if none such was ever knowne then you must shew some reason why the gesture used in the Sacrament should binde us to imitation rather then in any other Sacrament service or worship for it must seeme strange to any reasonable man that one onely gesture and that of all others the most unfit in one only ordinance should become necessary without any speciall commaund IV. God hath fully expressed what is necessary to bee observed in any of his Ordinances But in all the Booke of God there is not one word expressing what gesture wee should use in the Sacrament all the Evangelists are silent in this matter so is S. Paul though he professe to deliver all things necessary and essentiall to the Sacrament And on the contrary it is very probable that our Saviour had no intent to honour us with the gesture of sitting at the Sacrament for even while hee sate with his Disciples at the Passeover hee schooled them for looking for honour in sitting at the table Luk. XXII 26. Let the greatest among you be as the least and the chiefest as he that serveth for who is greater he that sitteth at table or he that serveth Is not he that sitteth at table and I am among you as he that serveth Now you doe presse us to shew expresse warrant out of Scripture for things which we acknowledge to bee in their owne nature free and indifferent and so need no particular warrant of the Word they being left to the discretion of the Church And yet you presse sitting at the Communion upon the consciences of people as a thing necessary and are not able to shew for it any warrant in the Word generall or particular If you say that you have the example of Christ and of his Disciples that will not serve your turne for you know not what gesture they used and albeit wee were certaine that they had sate as you doe yet that would not binde us to imitation without some other direction for doubtlesse if Christ had meant that his gesture in that Sacrament should be exemplary unto us hee would have put upon it some marke of immutabilitie considering that from the beginning of the world no gesture in any Sacrament or service was obligatory unto God's people by example V. If the gesture which Christ used in the ministration of the Sacrament was sitting or lying the same was occasion all from the Passeover as were many other circumstances which you your selves doe not observe Indeed if Christ had ministred that Sacrament without the conjunction of another meale and had purposely made choice of sitting rather then of kneeling or standing then there might have been more force in his example and yet no absolute necessitie of imitation But seeing it is manifest that if hee used that gesture it was to conforme himselfe to the custome of the Iewes as hee did in many other ceremonies and circumstances no reasonable man can thinke that gesture to be exemplary to us In the VI. place sect 34 I will consider your owne practise where I find that you follow not the example of Christ in many other circumstances which are of as great consequence and some of them greater too then is the gesture Christ ministred the Sacrament onely unto twelve or rather Eleaven you give it unto the whole congregation Christ gave it onely unto men you both to men and women They to whom Christ gave it were all ministers you give it unto the people Christ instituted the Sacrament at night after a full meale you in the morning fasting Christ ministred the same in a private chamber you in a publicke Church Christ used unleavened bread you leavened Christ was the sole minister of the Sacrament blessing and distributing both the Elements you commonly have one to assist you Christ blessed the Elements severally first the bread and afterward the cup you blesse both together Christ and his Disciples too used the same gesture in blessing and distributing which they did in receiving if they sate at one they sate also at the other you doe not so for howsoever you sit in the act of receiving yet the minister sits not when he blesseth the Elements and gives thanks but eyther stands or kneeles exhorting the people to humble themselves Now were it not strange if wee should be bound to imitate the
gesture of the Disciples in receiving and not the gesture of Christ in blessing Christ and his Disciples put of their shooes when they went to Supper as the manner of the Iewes was you doe not so when you come to the Sacrament Christ put on his upper garment after hee had washed his Disciples feete before he celebrated the Sacrament yet you will not be perswaded by that example to put on a Surplice and I am sure it is as easie from Christs upper garment which he put on when he went to the Sacrament to conclude for a Surplice or a Cope either as it is from Christs gesture to conclude a necessity of sitting at the Communion Christ and his Disciples leaned one in anothers bosome so doe not you Finally Christ and his Disciples had their heads covered you as yet have the manners to sit bare In all these you swarve as much from the example of Christ as we doe by kneeling for as these were changeable circumstances so is the gesture changeable inferiour to many of them For they are expressely mentioned in Scripture but there is not one word of the gesture Some of them were circumstances of choyce as namelȳ Christs blessing of the Elements apart But the gesture if it was sitting or lying was only occasionall Some of them were continued in the Church many hundred yeeres and namely the circumstance of time the Sacrament being celebrated after Supper according to Christs example and in many places of Africke they observed the very day even the first day of the weeke till the sixth Councell at Constantinople did appoint the Sacrament to bee celebrated in the morning when men are most apt for devotion But you are never able to shew that the gesture if it was sitting was used in any Church I might adde many other things wherein you follow not the example of Christ because you know it not Wee know not what forme of Bread Christ used what kinde of Wine what fashion of Cup what manner of Tablecloath what words he used in blessing and giving thankes after what manner hee brake the Bread and powred out the Wine into the Cup what quantitie of Bread and Wine they did receive and how long they were about that action All which are of greater importance then the gesture which as I have shewed before was never immutable in any Ordinance but alwayes free Therefore you shall doe well for shame if not for conscience sake not to take the holy name of Christ in vaine by pretending his example for sitting at the Communion seeing you doe not imitate his example in many other things more materiall then the gesture In the last place sect 35 that if the gesture of Christ and his Disciples in the first institution was sitting wee ought not to imitate it For there is great difference betweene the estate of the Apostles then and ours now betweene Christs estate of humiliation and his estate of exaltation betweene his presence in humility Matth. XX. 28. and his presence in glory In his first comming he came not to be served but to serve Ioh. XV. 15. Luk. XXII 27. He made himselfe familiar with his Disciples used them as his friends companions and he himselfe was amongst them as one that serveth And therefore they did never kneele downe to him in their ordinary prayers nor pray unto God particularly in his name as he sayth Ioh. XVI 24. Hither to have yee asked nothing in my name It is certain that the Disciples did pray unto God and did pray in the name of a mediator in generall else their prayers could not have been heard But at that time they did not make expresse mention of him in their prayers in regard their knowledge of his Godhead and of his Mediatorship was but obscure and imperfect and they then did not thinke that hee who was daily conversant with them upon earth was also present with the Father making intercession for them Yea at that time Christ did not desire to be worshipped as God Coeternall Coessentiall and Consubstantiall with the Father for he commanded his Disciples to conceale the glory of his Godhead Matt. XVII 9. which they saw in his transfiguration till after his resurrection And he charged his Disciples to tell no man that he was the Christ Matth. XVI 10. I finde that some did worship him in the dayes of his flesh but it is a question whether with a civill or with a divine worship And besides it was not in their ordinary prayers but upon extraordinary occasions as the working of a miracle Mark XIV 33. Luke V. 8. Or when they had some speciall suite unto him as Matth. VIII 2.9.18 XX. 20. Or when he was pleased gratiously to reveale himselfe as unto the blinde man whom hee healed Ioh. IX 38. This is certaine that while hee dwelt on earth hee was never worshipped in any publicke ordinance after a solemne manner as the common object of joynt adoration Nor yet expressely as the Mediator betweene God man Hebr. VII ◠for sayes the Apostle The way into the holiest of all was not opened while as the first Tabernacle was standing That is to say under the Olde Testament which was the first Tabernacle Christ who is the way unto heaven was not clearely manifested nor knowne unto men But now the first Tabernacle being remooved and the Vaile of the Temple rent this way is opened and Christ is knowne to be both God and Mediator betweene God man for he was declared mightily Rom. I. 4. to bee the sonne of God by his resurrection from the dead he was exalted at the right hand of God farre above principalities and powers Phil. II. 9. And God hath given him a name above every name that at the name of Iesus every knee should bow Then the Apostles Act. VII 59. who before were rude and ignorant did preach him openly and pray unto him by name and that upon their knees Now if the Apostles after his resurrection when they were filled with the Spirit did pray unto him kneeling which they had not used to doe before why may wee not think that then they also received the Sacrament kneeling albeit before they did sit with him at table while hee was pleased to use them as his companions and when their knowledge was but rude and unperfect Sure I am it doth not become us now for to challenge to be so familiar with him at his table as were his Disciples in the dayes of his flesh Thus have I clearely proved both that it is most unlikely that Christ and his Disciples sate in the institution of the Sacrament and also that though it were certaine they did sit yet the example of their gesture doth not binde us to imitation But I have forgot my selfe to insist so long upon this Argument My purpose at first was onely to give an instance of your sitting at the Communion as a Ceremonie used by you
to their husbands and testifie their subjection by this significant Ceremonie in comming alwayes to Church with their heads covered II. From Comelinesse vers 4. 5. 6. for it is even one very thing namely for a woman to bee bare-headed as though she were shaven And if it be shame for a woman to be shaven let her be covered and vers 13. Iudge in your selves Is it comely that a woman pray uncovered III. From nature vers 14. Doth not nature it selfe teach you But he saw the nature of the question would affoard no Arguments but such as a contentious spirit would elude Therefore to make short worke he finally resolves all into the Churches custome If any man be Contentious we have no such custome nor the Churches of God As if he should say If any man be so contentious that he will not be satisfied with these reasons Let him know that the Churches custome is otherwise We have no such custome c. Whence wee may inferre first that the Church hath her customes and had them even in the Apostles dayes for this Negative Wee have no such custome includes an affirmative A Custome they had but no such Custome as that men should be covered women bare but the contrary II. That the Church may alledge her Customes to stop the mouthes of the contentious III. That custome is warrant enough for a Rite as whether to be covered or bare whether to sit or to kneele whether to weare a blacke garment or a white in the administration of God's service IV. That whosoever opposeth the Churches customes in matters of Order are to be reputed contentious as hazarding the Churches peace for matters of no more weight Thus have I proved at large sect 28 that the Church hath power in things Indifferent to make Lawes and appoint Orders to be observed in the administration of Gods worship And that obedience is due unto such Lawes or if there be no certaine constitution that the received custome of the Church hath the force of a Law But here I know what you will say that the Church may appoint Circumstances not Ceremonies This was your Plea at the last visitation and a very strange one For this distinctioÌ„ is unknown vnto the Schooles not used by any Protestant divines except some late Libellers against the government whose unsavory bookes I never thought worthy of my reading Sure I am that your chiefe advocate Not that we say as you charge vs that no Ceremonie may be in the Church except the same be expressed in the word of God but that in making Orders and Ceremonies of the Church it is not lawful to doe what men list T. c. Reply p. 27. Mr Cartwright the only learned man who ever lifted up his hand against the Orders of our Church did not deny all Ceremonies but excepted against ours that they are not agreeable to the simplicity of the Gospell and to the practice of the Apostles that they are borrowed from the Papists give scandall to the weake and are different from the Orders of other reformed Churches And when these silly exceptions have been answered to the full his wise followers have devised a way to cut the Gordian knotte to-deny all Ceremonies except the Sacraments which are of Christs Institution And since that is the maine ground of your opposition I wil take some paines to discover unto the world the weakenesse of it And first I thinke it will puzle you all sect 29 to shew the difference betweene Circumstances Determinatio divini cultus pertinet ad ceremoniaâ— Aquin. 1â— 2ae q. 103. Art 1. â—on and Ceremonies If you say that a Ceremonie determines the manner of Gods worship a Circumstance onely the time place and person to be used in Gods service which are of absolute necessity in regard that his service must be performed at some time in some place by some person This distinction will not hold for it falleth out often that in the choyce of one time rather then another and of one person too there is something Ceremoniall I am sure that some of the Reformed Churches See harmon of confess Sect. 17. amongst the Ceremonies which they retaine and approve reckon festivall dayes set Lessons which are circumstances but Ceremoniall circumstances Secondly as it is necessary that there be some place and time appointed for Gods Service So also it is necessary that there be some outward forme besides what is expressely commaunded used in the Service of God And albeit the substance of religious actions be prescribed by God himselfe yet the outward forme required to the decent administration of the same and for the greater solemnity of the action is not expressed in the Scripture As for example Christ hath commaunded us to baptize with water in the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost here is both the matter and the forme wherein the essence of baptisme consists but what other words and actions we should use in the administration thereof we have no direction And yet if one should doe no more but sprinkle water upon a childe and pronounce the words of baptisme howsoever the baptisme were good yet the action would seeme bare and the Sacrament quickely grow into contempt Therefore the Church hath appointed prayers Lessons interrogatories exhortations and some visible signes also to bee used in the administration of that Sacrament These outward expressions of Gods worship whether by words or actions which are not essentiall unto the duty as not being expressely commaunded we call Ceremonies without which no publicke action can be rightly performed for as the flesh covereth the hollow deformity of the bones and beautifieth the body with naturall graces So Ceremonies cover the nakednesse of publicke actions both civill and religious and procure reverence and esteeme unto them in so much that no nation in the world did ever suffer publick actions which are of weight whether civill or sacred to passe without some visible solemnity So that there is a ground in nature for Ceremonies in generall for all nations by naturall instinct have observed them and for some Ceremonies in particular for Nature doth teach us that God is to be worshipped not only with the inward devotion of the heart but also with the outward reverence of the body And therefore all men by the inditement of reason have used to bow themselves to the ground in token of reverence at the sensible signes of Gods presence or when they have received any message from the Lord. It is therefore an error to thinke Ceremonies in the generall to be things merely indifferent for howsoever every particular Ceremony be indifferent and alterable yet that there should be some Ceremonies is absolutely necessary forasmuch as no outward worke in God's worship can bee performed without Ceremoniall Circumstances some or other more then a body can be without dimensions And since some Ceremonies must be used it is also necessary for preserving serving of Order and uniformity
unto the commandements of God which is the thing for which they are condemned as shall appeare unto any that reades the Text But our Church is farre from such presumption as may appeare by her doctrine published which I have alleadged as also by that which followeth in the same preface In these our doings wee condemne no other nations nor prescribe any thing but to our owne people only For we thinke it convenient that every Countrey should use such Ceremonies as they shall thinke best to the setting forth of Gods honour and glory and to the reducing of the people to a most perfect and godly living without error or superstition Now I have proved in my Sermon by Arguments unanswerable that the Church hath such a power to ordaine Ceremonies and to make Lawes of things indifferent for decencie and orders sake And that obedience ought to be given unto her constitutions Especially considering that therein our Church was not only assisted but authorized by the Kings most excellent Majesty as the supreme Governor upon Earth In all causes within his highnesse dominions And therefore I shall intreat my good brethren if they will neyther deceive others nor be deceived themselves that in this point of Christian liberty they would have alwayes one eye fixed upon the nature of things indifferent and the other upon the duty of a subject to his Soveraigne And now having vindicated our Church from those aspersions cast upon her of infringing Christian liberty and giving offence by her constitutions I will in the last place turne the Disputers weapon against himselfe and cut off the head of that Philistine with his owne sword shewing that he and his fellowes of all others are most injurious unto Christian liberty Rem XIV 16. which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it were the common good of Christians And also that they are scandalous to all sorts of persons And first Christian liberty as it respecteth things indifferent is not only a freedome from the yoke of bondage but also a right or power to doe many things which they could not doe who were under the Paâ—dagogie of the Law which by the Apostle is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I. Cor. VIII 9. This power or liberty is extended both to Magistrates and to subjects The Magistrate hath this liberty that he is not tyed to any particular Lawes which determine all things incident unto the outward form of Gods worship not mentioned in Scripture But as the Iudiciall Law being-abrogate it is lawfull for him to ordaine civill Lawes so the Ceremoniall Law being abolished to establish ecclesiasticall constitutions such as are not repugnant unto the word of God These men deprive him of this libertie they will not allow him to appoint any thing to be used in the outward forme and administration of Gods worship And if by the consent of the whole Church he doe establish a forme though never so decent they are resolved not to observe it Agayne the liberty of the subject is that being freed from the Moâ—aicall Law he may with a free conscience observe all other Lawes which are established by lawfull authority and are not repugnant unto the word of God I. Cor. VI. 12. Tit. I. 15. I. Pet. II. 13. 16. as knowing that All things are lawfull and To the pure all things are pure This freedome S. Peter magnifies when he exhorts us To submit our selves to all manner ordinance of man As free that is knowing that we are not bound to those particulars as things in themselves necessary but using them with free consciences as being indifferent and therefore such as whereunto our Christian liberty extendeth And is not this a goodly freedome that a Christian having liberty of many things he can make use thereof in one thing rather then in another to please and â—atiâ—fie him unto whose power God hath subjected him without offence to his conscience These men deprive us of this liberty likewise for they will not allow men to obey Magistrates civill or Ecclesiasticall in any constitution established touching the decent administration of Gods worship And as though they were Iudges at Law they have sent foorth a prohibition against all the Canons of our Church Now a negative precept is a restraint of Christian liberty as well as a Positive the false Apostles who laboured to subvert Christian liberty col II 21. did it by forbidding things in themselves lawfull saying Touch not â—aste not handle not And our brethren speake almost the same language Kneele not Crosse not weare not And indeed the Church hath not more positive precepts then they have negative But this is the difference The Church hath authority to command they have none to forbid The Church commands only the use of these things and layes no obligation upon the conscience by pressing them as simply necessary in themselves but they make their negative restraints absolutely necessary place religion in them binding their followers in conscience not only to refuse but also to despise our Ceremonies Whereby they doe not only overthrow Christian liberty but also are guiltie of the breach of the second Commandement by will-worship Lastly As they take both from the Lawgiver and the subject that free power which God hath granted unto them So they deprive themselves of all true liberty while they cherish in their owne minds doubts and scrupulous opinions of the lawfulnesse of these things which are commanded and alleadge their unresolved conscience as an excuse for their disobedience So our Disputer as he is acted in the Libell God alloweth every man to be fully perswaded in his owne minde of what he doeth Rom. XIV 5. Which priviledge I crave to my selfe and all others doubting of kneeling I have shewed before that the Apostle in that chapter as also I. Cor. 8. Speaketh of things left to our owne choyce and not determined by any Law civill or Ecclesiasticall In which case this is a safe rule for the conscience Let every man stand fully perswaded in his owne minde that he may doe or not doe that which hee intends without the offence of God or his neighbour But when the Magistrate doth interpose his authority to command or forbid the use of a thing in it selfe indifferent If any man shall plead that he can not obey because he is not perswaded in his owne minde of the lawfulnesse of the thing commanded he doth but excuse one sinne by another which S. Peter calls having the liberty for a cloake of maliciousnesse for as he ought nor to disobey so he ought not to doubt I. Pet. II. 13. 16. But as I sayd before submit himselfe unto all manner ordinance of man As free that is as being perswaded of the indifferency of the thing before God and so that he may lawfully therein obey his superiours And indeed if a mans doubts and feares were a sufficient excuse for disobedience the Magistrate should be obeyed in nothing for there
example But the accommodation of the gesture to severall parts of Gods worship left altogether to the liberty of the Church And the Church hath thought Kneeling the most decent and comely gesture to be used in the Sacrament wherein her determination is not to be esteemed a meere humane constitution for if an Ecclesiasticall Canon be made as this is of a thing indifferent in a lawfull manner to a lawfull end by lawfull authority according to the generall rules of Scripture The same is approved in the sight of God as not meerely humane but in some sort divine as is confessed by M. Calvin in these words Calv. in I. ad Cor. XIV ult Golligere promptum est has posteriores ecclesiasticas non esse habendas prohumanis traditionibus quandoquidem fundatâ— sunt in hoc generali mandato liquidam approbationeâ—â— habent quasi ex ore Christi And in another place he gives an example of Kneeling in Gods solemne worship Calv. Inst lib. IV. cap. 10. Sect. 30. and moves the Question Quaritur sitne humana traditio whereunto he answers Dico sic esse humanam ut simul sit divina Dei est quatenus pars est decoris illius cujus cur a observatio nobis per Apostolum commendatur Zanch in compend loc 16. Seâ— Epist 24. And to the same purpose we have the judgment of Zanchiâ— of Beza and indeed of all judicious Divines Hath not the Disputer then a face of brasse or as the Scripture speaketh a whoores forehead who calls Kneeling a needlesse humane Ceremonie I have now proved both that all humane inventions which have been abused are not therefore to be abolished which I shall have occasion to manifest further hereafter And also that Kneeling at the Sacrament is no humane invention In the third place I will make it appeare that our Kneeling was never abused to Idolatry for as it was not devised by Papists so we received it not from them To let passe the Church of Scotland where that gesture was intermitted for the space of above forty yeares till all memory of former superstition was past Even in the Church of England the gesture of Kneeling was not continued for in the beginning of King Edwards reigne there was an intermission for a space when all gestures were free But the Church afterwards perceiving the inconvenience thereof thought fit to reduce all her Children to an Uniformity in Gods worship by ordaining one gesture to be used in that Ordinance And she made choyce of Kneeling not out of a desire of conformity with Papists or out of an honourable respect to their worship But having a liberty of gestures allowed her in Gods word she did judge Kneeling of all others to be most fit decent and comely But say that we had received that gesture from the Papists as we did Ordination Baptisme and many other good things yet it cannot be imagined how they could abuse that which was never in their power to use for the gesture which we use is our owne the Papists never had the command of it And Tit. 1.15 Vnto the pure sayth the Apostle all things are pure Surely there cannot be a more senselesse dottage then to think that the Papists by their Idolatrous kneeling have infected ours when their gesture and ours is not the same Apud Plutarch Heraclitus sayd that it is impossible for any man eundem fluvium hiâ— intrare I may say as truely that it is impossible for any man eandem actionem â—iâ— peragerè for though the man be the same the knee the same the end the same yet the Action repeated is not the same for to make an action such as kneeling is the same all these things must concurre Idem agens Idem agendi modus finis tempus locus All which are impossible to concurre any oftner then once So that it is certaine that our kneeling at the Sacrament is not Individually and Numerically the same with that which is used by the Papists I will now proceed further and shew that it is not so much as of the same kind with theirs being distinguished from it by two or three substantiall differences The first is taken from the Agents their kneeling is the gesture of Papists ours of Catholickes Now if Papists and Protestants be two diverse kinds of worshippers which I thinke the brethren will acknowledge then their actions of worship must be as different in kind as be their Agents The second difference betweene their kneeling and ours is taken from their different ends and objects which makes them yet more distant for Actiones distinguuntur finibus gestures and actions are principally distinguished by their objects and ends They in kneeling at the Sacrament worship their breaden-god Wee detest that abominable bread-worship and worship only the great God of heaven and earth in his owne Ordinance his Son Iesus Christ who sitteth at the right hand of the Father in heavenly places From these two differences there arises a third that their kneeling is formally evill Ours good and commendable so that if any man for the abuses of their kneeling shall condemne ours it is all one injustice as if ye should condemne an innocent man for the crime of a malefactor Esay V. 20. Proverb XVII 1â— and so he falleth directly under the curse of the Prophet Woe be unto them that call good evill And of the wise-man He that Iustifieth the wicked and he that condemneth the lust they are both abomination unto the Lord for as S. Austin sayes Peccat Lib. IIV cap. 15. de lib. arb qui damnat quasi peccata quae nulla sunt And those men condemne our kneeling for sinne which is none but an expression of many vertuous affections And for this I am sure they have no warrant for whensoever God commands his people to destroy monuments of Idolatry the commandement is to be understood of the same Individua which have beene abused not that the whole Species for their sake is to be destroyed Deut. VII 5. They are commanded to cut downe the groves of Idols yet they did not cut downe all groves for then they should not have left one tree growing They are also commanded to overthrow the Altars of Idols yet the Israelites did not thinke themselves bound by that commandement to overthrow the Reubenites Altar though it were erected without any warrant and in shew had some repugnancie with Gods commandement for as you may read Iosh XXII When the Tribe of Reuben Gad and the halfe tribe of Manasses erected an Altar upon the passages of Iordan the other Tribes were so offended that they were about to destroy both it and them imagining that it had beene for sacrifice But when they were truely informed that it was only for a memoriall that they had a part in the God of Israel they were well pleased they blessed God and Phineas said This day we perceive the Lord is among us because you have not
shall hew downe the graven Images of their gods and destroy the names of them out of that place But what is this to our gesture of Kneeling at the Communion Will any man reason from the abolishment of a substantiall Idoll-object of worship to naturall gestures which have ever been and ever will be common to the worship of damnable Idols with that of the true God II. He forbids the heathenish idolatrous manner of worship such actions and performances as were only applyed to false worship are in themselves simply evill and so cannot be used to God And hereunto onely the latter place which is alleadged hath relation as is evident in the Text enquire not after their gods saying How did these nations serve their gods even so will I doe likewise Thou shalt not doe so unto the Lord thy God for every abomination to the Lord which he hateth have they done unto their gods for even their sonnes and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods Now will any man say that these actions have any Analogie with our kneeling unto God in any of his Ordinances which was used in the worship of the true God before ever it was given unto any Idol III. The places of Idol-worship must be abolished for which there was a speciall reason unto the Iewes which doth not concerne us God having made choice of mount Sion to place his Name there And thereunto especially the first place hath respect you shall burne their groves with fire yee shall not doe so unto the Lord your God that is you shall not serve him in Groves or upon high mountaines But unto the place which the Lord your God shall choose out of all your tribes to put his Name there even unto his habitation shall ye seeke and thither thou shalt come I hope no man from thence can inferre the abolishing of a naturall gesture alwayes used in Gods worship Lastly he commaunds them to destroy the instruments and appurtenances of Idolatrous worship you shall overthrow their Altars and breake their Pillars of which sort also are the ornaments of the Idols expressely condemned Esay XXX 22. Yee shall defile also the covering of thy graven Images of silver and the ornament of thy molten Images of Gold Thou shalt cast them away as a menstruous cloth Thou shalt say unto it Get thee hence From whence no man can prove the unlawfulnesse of our gesture at the Communion more then he can of the Sacrament it selfe For I. These instruments and ornaments were artificiall things Our gesture is naturall so Gods creature or an ability whereunto man is disposed by creation It is Gods Ordinance which he hath sanctified for his owne worship as may appeare both by precept and president in Scripture And therefore according to their owne divinity cannot be abolished albeit it hath been abused by Idolaters II. Those instruments and ornaments were the same Individualls which were abused so is not our kneeling at the Sacrament the same with the kneeling of either Pagan or Papist as I have formerly proved III. These instruments ornaments did not first belong unto the service of the true God were from thence applyed unto the service of an Idoll But were devised invented for the Idol-worship But all gestures especially kneeling did from the beginning belong unto the service of the true God and were from thence transferred from Gods worship to Idolatry by plaine theft unjust alienation of his title and interest Now can there be an Act more just then to give unto God that which is Gods restoring the gesture of kneeling unto the true use which Idolaters had sacrilegiously usurped Ezra I. 7. Nebuchadnezar defiled the vessels of the Temple put them in the house of his god yet the same being restored by Cyrus were notwithstanding of the abuse imployed in Gods service as before In like manner why should not kneeling which at first belonged to the service of God though it hath been abused at the Masse be thought fit to be used at the Sacrament Finally those instruments ornaments had no other use but for the honour of the Idoll But our gesture of kneeling as it is not used in honour of the Popish Masse so it hath a needfull use in Gods worship in this very ordinance as after I shall declare By this time I hope any man who hath the least sparke of understanding may perceive to how little purpose the Disputer did alleadge that place of Deuteronomie But I will goe further direct him unto all those places in Scripture which condemne either monuments of Idolatry or communion with Idolaters such as are Gen. 35.4 Exod. 23.13.24.32 chap. 34.12 Levit. 18.3 chap 19.19.27 Numb 33.52 Deuter. 7.2.3.5 chap. 9.21 chap. 14.1 Iosh 23.7 2. Kings 23.4.6 c. 1. Chron. 14.12 2. Chron. 33.15 2. Cor. 6.16.17 Revel 2.14 Let him now examine all these places and he shall find that all which is condemned is either one of these foure things which before I mentioned in that place of Deuteronomie or else meates sacrificed unto Idols which yet are allowed out of the case of scandal 1. Cor. 10.27 or communion with Idolaters in their false worship Or making of covenants leagues of familiarity especially marriages with them Or finally civill uncleannesse as making of baldnesse upon their heads marring the corners of their beards using mixtures of cattell of diverse kindes and of linnen and woollen in the same garment which did belong unto the Ceremoniall Law whereby Gods people were severed from other nations in many outward observances But in all these places or in any other place of Scripture there is nothing forbidden which can by the least Analogie be applyed unto our kneeling at the Sacrament or unto any other gesture which we use in any of Gods Ordinances In a word as the Sunne Moone and Starres which have beene notoriously abused to Idolatry can not be destroyed partly because they are out of our power and partly because they are of durable neceility Even so for the same reasons gestures which have been abused cannot be abolished because such gestures as have been already abused by others are out of our reach and all gestures are of durable necessity to mankind for ever Now have I made it as cleere as the Sunne that our kneeling at the Sacrament is not to bee reckoned amongst those things which have been abused to Idolatry and therefore is not to be abolished But because they use this Argument against other Ceremonies of our Church I wil looke more neerely into the true meaning and intent of that Law which God gave unto his people for destroying the complements of Idolatrous worship that thereby all men may judge how farre we are bound by that Commandement to abolish things which have beene Idolatrously abused And I find it most evident that the strictnesse of that Law in respect of many things which were to be destroyed concerned